Letter: Responsibility

Barack Obama: “I didn’t set a red line; the world set a red line. My credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line. And America and Congress’ credibility is on the line.”

To which of these commanders in chief would you be willing to entrust the welfare of your children or grandchildren — the one who accepts personal responsibility, or the one who assigns it to everyone else?

Comments

It is not just assigning responsibility to others it is lying. There is video of Obama clearly setting the redline - his redline. So he is lying when he says he didn't set a red line.

Mr. President you said it, now man up and own it.

And now he is delegating responsibility to Putin. Let Russia handle it so he can save face by not having congress vote against military action in Syria and not anger the majority of Americans no do not want us to be the world police.

I appreciate that the LTE writer submitted his comments while events were rapidly changing as pertains America and the world's response to Assad's use of poison gas on his own people. Gassing his own in addition to pounding them with air strikes, artillery and rocket bombardment, tank and other motorized assault, snipers firing indiscriminately into crowds, etc.

Personally, I am relieved that our current Commander in Chief is the sort who would issue a verbal threat against a lethal tyrant such as Assad. Obama's threat was intended to stay Assad's hand. It didn't work, but only because Assad is a maniacal killer who has long exploited Russia's need for a military base on Syrian territory, by using Russian-supplied weapons to murder his domestic opponents by the trainload.

But by ordering that poison gas attack, Assad did indeed cross a "red line". He crossed everybody's red line, definitely including Russia's. Which is why, thanks to Obama's diplomacy efforts prior to ordering military strikes, Russia is on board with the United States in getting Syria's chemical weapons inventory collected and destroyed.

Is this a "cowardly outcome" that destroys America's credibility? Probably looks that way to those who love war and hate Obama. The rest of us are breathing a little easier right now, thank you very much.

No that is not what he said. His words were that he planned to attack if Congress agreed, but in his desire to attack, the attack was mitigated by the superpower who supplied the chemical arms to begin with, which is a good thing for both sides. His steadfastness has caused the agreement to happen. If he was wishywashy like Fred Mertz suggested, that agreement wouldn't have come about and Assad could continue to kill his own people.

Obama wanted to attack but realized public sentiment was against him so he punted to Congress which actually he all all presidents should do. When he saw Congress wasn't going to support him he asked them not to vote to avoid losing face.